The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On February 7, 2006, the summary of the facts charged reveals that A is a spouse who has completed a marriage report with D on Feb. 7, 2006, the Defendant provided one-time sexual intercourse with A at the “Felel” near the E in the Masung-gun, Madong-gun on Nov. 1, 2008, and one-time sexual intercourse with A on December 21, 2008 at the Mael where the trade name located in the regular business district in the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju is unknown.

2. The prosecutor of the judgment, applying Article 241(1) of the Criminal Act to the facts charged in the instant case, was prosecuted, and the judgment subject to the judgment that found the Defendant guilty became final and conclusive on September 18, 2009.

However, on February 26, 2015, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that Article 241 of the Criminal Act, including the applicable provisions of this Act, is in violation of the Constitution (the Constitutional Court Decision 2009Hun-Ba17,205, 2010Hun-Ba194, 2011Hun-Ba4, 2012Hun-Ba57, 255, 411, 2013Hun-Ba139, 161, 267, 276, 342, 365, 2014Hun-Ba53, 464, 201Hun-Ba31, 2014Hun-Ba4, 31, 2014Hun-Ba4, 207Hun-Ba1, 208, 208Hun-Ba2086, 208, 208, 208).

On the other hand, where the provisions of the Punishment Act retroactively lose its effect due to the decision of unconstitutionality, the defendant's case which was prosecuted by applying the relevant provisions shall be deemed to constitute a crime.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 91Do2825, May 8, 1992; 2005Do8317, Jun. 28, 2007). 3. As such, the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, a judgment of innocence is rendered pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.